PDA

View Full Version : Banning Members



Dracula
03-12-2016, 08:11 AM
Bill is now on a one-month ban until he can learn to be nice. Constantly insulting other members is not going to be tolerated; if he is able to act civil on DMCTalk, the same behavior is expected here.

His ban can be lifted if he is willing to agree to stop insulting other members.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 12:18 PM
Bill is now on a one-month ban until he can learn to be nice. Constantly insulting other members is not going to be tolerated; if he is able to act civil on DMCTalk, the same behavior is expected here.

His ban can be lifted if he is willing to agree to stop insulting other members.

Not appropriate.

Lou can call Bill derogatory names (insane, crazy, etc), but when Bill responds in kind (losers, leeches, etc) he gets banned, while Lou remains unbanned for engaging in the exact same behavior? :confused:

There's no consistency here.

Sorry my friend, but you're too close to this one, and I'm afraid your objectivity has been compromised, hence I'm overriding this action.

Boo
03-12-2016, 12:22 PM
Remember, Josh is here to protect Bill.

Ban me, fuck it. Ill take it. I wasnt 'nice' to the man who screwed me over I Know. What an I going to miss ? Matts useful mechanical advice and accusations? :rolleyes:

Boo
03-12-2016, 12:27 PM
Admin decisions need to be made jointly and only enforced with the OK of Steve. It's the only way this site can have any integrity.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 12:28 PM
Not appropriate.

Lou can call Bill derogatory names (insane, crazy, etc), but when Bill responds in kind (losers, leeches, etc) he gets banned, while Lou remains unbanned for engaging in the exact same behavior? :confused:

There's no consistency here.

Sorry my friend, but you're too close to this one, and I'm afraid your objectivity has been compromised, hence I'm overriding this action.



I'm reinstating it based off of my discussions with Steve. The idea to ban Bill until the behavior improves was Steve's; I merely enacted it.

Boo
03-12-2016, 12:29 PM
Josh cannot undo Steve's actions , that has to remain the law.

After all , this is Steve's forum , not Josh's, Chad's, Bill's, mine, or anyone else's.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 12:34 PM
If anything, I was being lenient. The initial discussion with Steve called for a ban that would only be lifted if Bill chose to reach out to Steve and agree to stop insulting our members and play nice. (The same as his terms of re-admittance on Talk.)

Subsequently, Lou is not allowed to insult Bill, either.

Boo
03-12-2016, 12:38 PM
Agreed, I think his actions have spoken volumes already.

Let all personal insults be 'stricken from the record'.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 12:50 PM
Admin actions need to be objective, fair, and consistently applied.

Lou has been calling Bill names on this forum for a several months now, and yet, he was never banned. If you're going to start banning people for calling other's names, then Lou technically deserves an even longer ban than Bill's based on the objective demonstrative evidence found on posts on this forum.

I don't want to ban Lou. Nor do I want to ban Bill. Nothing good would come of those bans.

Honeslty, if inconsistent and unequal administration is the way that Steve and Chad are now going to run this forum, then I'll step down and leave, as this place clearly is no longer the place that it was intended to be when it was originally founded and has given up on its principles.

Are you guys really going to let this place denigrate into yet another Talk?

Dracula
03-12-2016, 12:53 PM
To further illustrate that there is no favoritism, Lou is receiving a final public reprimand: if he does not cease to insult forum members, he, too, will receive a one-month ban.

Just as Bill was asked to be nice, so is Lou. This is a formal public notice.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 01:01 PM
To further illustrate that there is no favoritism, Lou is receiving a final public reprimand: if he does not cease to insult forum members, he, too, will receive a one-month ban.

Just as Bill was asked to be nice, so is Lou. This is a formal public notice.

Lou was also asked several times to keep his reviews of Bill's product and services to the review thread. Yet, once again, when I log on today, I find a review in Bill's wait list thread.

Lou is just as guilty as Bill, if not more.

Either we ban both or we ban neither - those are the only choices.

I vote for neither.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 01:03 PM
Josh cannot undo Steve's actions , that has to remain the law.

After all , this is Steve's forum , not Josh's, Chad's, Bill's, mine, or anyone else's.

Josh is the only one acting objective, consistent, and fairly regarding this entire Bill situation.

Chad and Lou are too close to the Bill situation, as they have contractual relations with Bill. Thus, they have a conflict of interest and their objectivity towards the situation has been compromised.

Josh is not involved in a contractual relation with Bill. Josh's only interest in this situation is the integrity of the forum. Thus, Josh should be the one to decide the admin actions that affect this situation.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:04 PM
To further illustrate that there is no favoritism, Lou is receiving a final public reprimand: if he does not cease to insult forum members, he, too, will receive a one-month ban.

Just as Bill was asked to be nice, so is Lou. This is a formal public notice.

Was that because of something i just said ? Sorry, I just don't know if that was a formality or because of what I just said about "speaks volumes" -was that an insult? :dunno:

I do say that Steve must have all finalist in any actions taken, but I won't complain if I get banned , I wasn't following the ' be nice' rule I admit .

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:05 PM
Josh is the only one acting objective, consistent, and fairly.

:rolleyes:

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:06 PM
I'm honestly sorry I may lost interest he wrong thread and that's a problem, but i just respond to things I see. I don't go looking for the appropriate thread for what I'm saying in response.

One thing I was graced (or plagued) with is not having OCD.

Now I didn't mean that as an insult to anyone but I never needed everything to 'be in its place'. In hindsight it may have better to say it that way.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:06 PM
Was that because of something i just said ? Sorry, I just don't know if that was a formality or because of what I just said about "speaks volumes" -was that an insult? :dunno:

I do say that Steve must have all finalist in any actions taken, but I won't complain if I get banned , I wasn't following the ' be nice' rule I admit .

I will be discussing the matter with Steve; though, your last comment wasn't the issue. It was some of the previous ones; those insulting Matt.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:08 PM
The difference is that there has been more of an attempt to reign in Bill than there has been with Lou. Lou is getting the same degree of treatment as Bill.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:12 PM
I will be discussing the matter with Steve; though, your last comment wasn't the issue. It was some of the previous ones; those insulting Matt.
Because I said 'another useful post' -that was I response to him saying that to me in another these a little while ago. It's an inside joke. Where else did I 'insult' him? By asking , or Maybe revealing, that he works for Bill and may have a biased view?


:dunno:

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:13 PM
I'm also washing my hands of any contracts with Bill. He agreed to a payment for all of the items.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:14 PM
We seriously need a very specific list of what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' around here. Free speech has turned into too many technicalities in my opinion. So nothing negative is allowed on the free speech forum? Does watch what you say mean only make mechanical and/or technical posts? Talk, here we come.
If I can't home around on here there's really no reason for me to post anyway. I wouldn't just lurk for info, and if I still have any friends here I could email them and they could send me any pictures I needed to see .

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:17 PM
It was snarky, but not an insult. It's a very fine line and the reason that you are receiving a warning at this time.

I am adding a detailed explanation of it to the forum at the moment.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:19 PM
So 'snarky' isn't allowed? I thought libelous was the problem. We went from libelous to snarky?

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:20 PM
Snarky is allowed; long and detailed explanation to come.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:22 PM
Well how do we show when something is a ribbing or a roast? Or is that not allowed anymore?

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:23 PM
I personally had no problem with Rich calling me a prick, I can understand guy humor.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:24 PM
Give me a minute to finish working on the explanation, will you?

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 01:25 PM
Once again, shit was started that I don't have time to deal with right now. I have to go.

I just talked to Steve and he said that I should make the call regarding this situation.

If Chad wants to ban Bill than he must ban Lou as well for an equal amount of time.

Otherwise no one gets banned.

I hope that this is understood by everyone.

I have to go though and will not be back until later tonight.

So please, play nice :thumbup:

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:26 PM
I understand the equal ban thing.
:thumbup:

My only intent and practice was to be fair and objective.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 01:31 PM
Damn it - I just had to un-ban Bill yet again.

Again, we're going to be equal, fair, consistent, and objective here, or I'm going to get PISSED!

STOP banning Bill.

No one is getting banned.

There are no steadfast rules about what one can and cannot post here other than porn. We only ask that you treat others as you'd like to be treated by them. Again, we all know that the Nazi shit was NOT very nice. But it has been dealt with. Let's move on.

Please play nice while I'm gone. :thumbup:

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:34 PM
I thought this was Steve's forum. How can Josh override Steve?

And I think Josh needs to call Steve.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:36 PM
I banned him hours ago; when I said I was reinstating it. Though, if Steve has changed his position, I will respect Steve's wishes; despite the fact that I think Bill's actions have been considerably worse than Lou's.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:37 PM
Let me just say that whenever you have an open discussion forum, people aren't always agoign to agree and some may know members that they had bad dealings with. Some may voice things to each other not because of how they want to be treated but rather how they were in fact treated which may be negative. If we enforce a rule that everyone has to get along then this is not far from becoming a Talk-esque forum.
Is this the end of the free speech uncensored , anything but porn forum? I do agree with Josh on that. I am not for banning anyone but rather being able to tolerate or ignore posts with negative feelings not make rules about what's insulting or not.

Just my 2 cents.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 01:39 PM
Then we should wipe the slate clean from here on out and, if anyone starts spewing insults against members, they will be dealt with.

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:41 PM
I banned him hours ago; when I said I was reinstating it. Though, if Steve has changed his position, I will respect Steve's wishes; despite the fact that I think Bill's actions have been considerably worse than Lou's.

Steve?
:popcorn:

Boo
03-12-2016, 01:42 PM
Then we should wipe the slate clean from here on out and, if anyone starts spewing insults against members, they will be dealt with.
Please link me to the specific 'what's an insult and what's not' post.

Edit: oops found it , sorry.

Duplicate Account
03-12-2016, 02:35 PM
7443

Dead Lesbian Goat
03-12-2016, 02:40 PM
7443

Don't be a rick Sim.

Boo
03-12-2016, 02:56 PM
Don't be a rick Sim.

You are too much !


LOVE IT !!!

:hysterical:

Glad to see your finally posting your humor around here Michael!!

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:22 PM
I'm honestly sorry I may lost interest he wrong thread and that's a problem, but i just respond to things I see. I don't go looking for the appropriate thread for what I'm saying in response.

One thing I was graced (or plagued) with is not having OCD.

Now I didn't mean that as an insult to anyone but I never needed everything to 'be in its place'. In hindsight it may have better to say it that way.

I'm not super anal either, however, Bill previously requested that the wait list thread NOT be crapped on, and as a forum, we agreed that such request was reasonable. Hence the reason that the review thread was started - a place for you, Chad, and anyone elese who wanted to review Bill's carb conversion kit. It was equal, fair, and it was an arrangement that kept everyone happy.


But then you started crapping all over the wait list thread again. So once again, I had to request that you stop and move such comments to the review thread. You acknowledged this, and I thought that we had an understanding, but less than 12 hours later, when I logged on early this afternoon, once again, you had crapped all over the wait list thread.

Your free to go to town on Bill as much as you want in the review thread, thus I don't understand why you can't seem to resist crapping on his wait list thread, as all such will do is create further chaos and animosity? :dunno:

Not to mention that doing so creates a bunch of extra work for me that I don't want to have to deal with. I'd rather be responding to Rich's exhaust questions right now, but instead, I'm wasting my time dealing with admin bullshit that never should have come in the first place had everyone just done what they agreed to do in the first place.

Get it?

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:24 PM
The difference is that there has been more of an attempt to reign in Bill than there has been with Lou. Lou is getting the same degree of treatment as Bill.

Not sure I follow.... :confused:

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:26 PM
I'm also washing my hands of any contracts with Bill. He agreed to a payment for all of the items.

That's great :thumbup:

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:27 PM
We seriously need a very specific list of what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' around here. Free speech has turned into too many technicalities in my opinion. So nothing negative is allowed on the free speech forum? Does watch what you say mean only make mechanical and/or technical posts? Talk, here we come.
If I can't home around on here there's really no reason for me to post anyway. I wouldn't just lurk for info, and if I still have any friends here I could email them and they could send me any pictures I needed to see .

I don't think we needed any rules pertaining to such all.

What we need is for everyone to just drop the shit and act like adults.....

Rich_NYS
03-12-2016, 07:28 PM
i'm not super anal either, however, bill previously requested that the wait list thread not be crapped on, and as a forum, we agreed that such request was reasonable. Hence the reason that the review thread was started - a place for you, chad, and anyone elese who wanted to review bill's carb conversion kit. It was equal, fair, and it was an arrangement that kept everyone happy.


But then you started crapping all over the wait list thread again. So once again, i had to request that you stop and move such comments to the review thread. You acknowledged this, and i thought that we had an understanding, but less than 12 hours later, when i logged on early this afternoon, once again, you had crapped all over the wait list thread.

Your free to go to town on bill as much as you want in the review thread, thus i don't understand why you can't seem to resist crapping on his wait list thread, as all such will do is create further chaos and animosity? :dunno:

Not to mention that doing so creates a bunch of extra work for me that i don't want to have to deal with. I'd rather be responding to rich's exhaust questions right now, but instead, i'm wasting my time dealing with admin bullshit that never should have come in the first place had everyone just done what they agreed to do in the first place.

Get it?

+1

(fwiw)

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:33 PM
We seriously need a very specific list of what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' around here. Free speech has turned into too many technicalities in my opinion. So nothing negative is allowed on the free speech forum? Does watch what you say mean only make mechanical and/or technical posts? Talk, here we come.
If I can't home around on here there's really no reason for me to post anyway. I wouldn't just lurk for info, and if I still have any friends here I could email them and they could send me any pictures I needed to see .


It was snarky, but not an insult. It's a very fine line and the reason that you are receiving a warning at this time.

I am adding a detailed explanation of it to the forum at the moment.


So 'snarky' isn't allowed? I thought libelous was the problem. We went from libelous to snarky?


Snarky is allowed; long and detailed explanation to come.


Well how do we show when something is a ribbing or a roast? Or is that not allowed anymore?


Then we should wipe the slate clean from here on out and, if anyone starts spewing insults against members, they will be dealt with.

The problem with what you guys are talking about here is that it's way too subjective of a standard in order to create and enforce any steadfast rules that would apply to all circumstances.

All such a rule would do is stifle certain speech and ruin the fun/camaraderie on the forum.

Again, all we need is for our members to pull their heads out of their asses and act like adults.

Dracula
03-12-2016, 07:34 PM
I'm not super anal either, however, Bill previously requested that the wait list thread NOT be crapped on, and as a forum, we agreed that such request was reasonable. Hence the reason that the review thread was started - a place for you, Chad, and anyone elese who wanted to review Bill's carb conversion kit. It was equal, fair, and it was an arrangement that kept everyone happy.


But then you started crapping all over the wait list thread again. So once again, I had to request that you stop and move such comments to the review thread. You acknowledged this, and I thought that we had an understanding, but less than 12 hours later, when I logged on early this afternoon, once again, you had crapped all over the wait list thread.

Your free to go to town on Bill as much as you want in the review thread, thus I don't understand why you can't seem to resist crapping on his wait list thread, as all such will do is create further chaos and animosity? :dunno:

Not to mention that doing so creates a bunch of extra work for me that I don't want to have to deal with. I'd rather be responding to Rich's exhaust questions right now, but instead, I'm wasting my time dealing with admin bullshit that never should have come in the first place had everyone just done what they agreed to do in the first place.

Get it?

Bill was told to stop insulting Lou and I in the wait list thread if he wanted to keep it objective. He chose not to.


Not sure I follow.... :confused:

Bill has whined more than Lou and been reprimanded more.


That's great :thumbup:

Bill didn't agree, but I decided that, since he was previously OK with everything, all my obligations are met.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:35 PM
+1

(fwiw)

Thanks Brah :thumbup:

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:36 PM
I thought this was Steve's forum. How can Josh override Steve?

And I think Josh needs to call Steve.

Steve trusts my ability to be impartial, objective, fair, and equal.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:39 PM
I banned him hours ago; when I said I was reinstating it. Though, if Steve has changed his position, I will respect Steve's wishes; despite the fact that I think Bill's actions have been considerably worse than Lou's.

When I talked to Steve, he agreed that in order to maintain the integrity of the forum, we need to use admin actions objectively, impartially, fairly, and equally, otherwise we denigrate and become no better than Talk.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:51 PM
Bill was told to stop insulting Lou and I in the wait list thread if he wanted to keep it objective. He chose not to.

I'm not seeing where Bill insulted you and Lou in the wait list thread. Were posts deleted that I'm unaware of?

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 07:58 PM
Bill has whined more than Lou and been reprimanded more.

Again, I'm not following this. I guess I need examples. Lou whines all the time - just take a look at this thread alone for proof of that.

The only thing that Bill whined about that I'm aware of is people crapping on the wait list thread.

Bill was indeed reprimanded more, though, most of the past reprimands were largely unjustified - such as the time that Bill's threads in the Open section were segregated by you and Michael. That made NO SENSE what-so-ever.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 08:00 PM
Bill didn't agree, but I decided that, since he was previously OK with everything, all my obligations are met.

Well, that's for you guys to work out I guess.

What are you going to do if he sends you back your camshaft though, as he previously stated he was going to do?

Dracula
03-12-2016, 08:11 PM
I'm not seeing where Bill insulted you and Lou in the wait list thread. Were posts deleted that I'm unaware of?

Some were; particularly those where he urged others to follow his example and attack me.


Again, I'm not following this. I guess I need examples. Lou whines all the time - just take a look at this thread alone for proof of that.

The only thing that Bill whined about that I'm aware of is people crapping on the wait list thread.

Bill was indeed reprimanded more, though, most of the past reprimands were largely unjustified - such as the time that Bill's threads in the Open section were segregated by you and Michael. That made NO SENSE what-so-ever.

Bill also whined about me being an admin and a member of the forum because of what he THINKS I believe.


Well, that's for you guys to work out I guess.

What are you going to do if he sends you back your camshaft though, as he previously stated he was going to do?

Put it on a shelf. I went through a lot of trouble to pull it for him and, following salvage yard SOP, there are no returns since he changed his mind several months later.

NightFlyer
03-12-2016, 09:15 PM
Some were; particularly those where he urged others to follow his example and attack me.

Because we frown upon deletion, I like to leave a note in the thread where the post(s) deletion occurred, explaining exactly why I deleted said posts. The only time I don't leave a note is if I'm deleting a duplicate post. Transparency of administration was one of the principles upon which the forum was founded, right?


Bill also whined about me being an admin and a member of the forum because of what he THINKS I believe.

Was that in the wait list thread, or is this all going back to the Nazi thread? I didn't think that you took the crap in the Nazi thread personally or literally, as you posted at least a couple times in that thread stating that Bill's accusations didn't phase you and that they only went to show how foolish he was being about the whole thing. Did you change your mind / position about that?


Put it on a shelf. I went through a lot of trouble to pull it for him and, following salvage yard SOP, there are no returns since he changed his mind several months later.

Sounds fair to me.

Pertaining to your contractual relations with Bill, everytime the subject comes up, the forum learns of new details. That's why I suggested public adjudication of the situation here on the forum, as it would allow both side to tell their full versions of the story with all the details surrounding said transactions.

While we've always been good and I've no reason to doubt your word, I've also always been good with Bill, thus I've no reason to doubt his word either.

As the situation has already been publicized here, I just wish that we had all the facts from both sides of the equation, so that the matter could be definitively resolved, at least as far as the forum's aspect of the situation is concerned. As it is, all we really have are incomplete stories from both sides, where-upon new info is shared every time the issue comes up.

Perhaps Bill would agree to an adjudication, as you both appear to have legitimate grievances, and neither side is willing to budge from their respective positions. For the sake of the forum though, I think it'd be worth attempting to resolve the situation. I know that you already stated that you were game. I'll see if I can get Bill to agree.